*Official* England in South Africa Thread

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

And after seeing the dismissal, it was a fairly standard delivery that did absolutely nothing.

Except maximize upon a clear weakness in Vaughan's game at the moment. Thus it was good bowling. Poor footwork and batplay by Vaughan yes, but credit must go to Langeveldt too.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Except maximize upon a clear weakness in Vaughan's game at the moment. Thus it was good bowling. Poor footwork and batplay by Vaughan yes, but credit must go to Langeveldt too.

It's not exactly a weakness like Lara has to leg-stump yorkers that takes a good degree of skill to exploit tho is it?

Basically any line & length delivery and Vaughan does his 6-inch curtain-rail (he kind of pushes the bat sideways and at a slight angle) guide to the wicket-keeper or slips.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

It's not exactly a weakness like Lara has to leg-stump yorkers that takes a good degree of skill to exploit tho is it?

Basically any line & length delivery and Vaughan does his 6-inch curtain-rail (he kind of pushes the bat sideways and at a slight angle) guide to the wicket-keeper or slips.

It's still thoughtful bowling and you can't begrudge a person for doing it. You can't take anything away from Langeveldt because the person he got out doesn't require a superb delivery to get out. He was picked to get the wickets and he got them thoughtfully and impressively. Whether or not he bowled a superb delivery in that instance, the fact is that Vaughan got out.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Err line & length bowling is thoughtful?

The fact remains that the bowlers aren't really in this game as far as wicket-taking is concerned until you get to the tail-enders. You get 7 batsmen who apply themselves properly on that wicket 4 or 5 will get 100s and as a bowler all you can do is slow the run-rate. If you get most of the 7 batsmen who throw away their wickets then apart from being reasonably economical it's not really down to the bowlers - it was almost a lottery which of the bowlers got the wickets.

 

[BoyBrumby]

It's still thoughtful bowling and you can't begrudge a person for doing it. You can't take anything away from Langeveldt because the person he got out doesn't require a superb delivery to get out. He was picked to get the wickets and he got them thoughtfully and impressively. Whether or not he bowled a superb delivery in that instance, the fact is that Vaughan got out.

Compared to the deliveries that got Tres, Key & Strauss out it was an absolute jaffa!

Vaughanie's form seems to have been on a general downward spiral since The Ashes of 02/03. He's played a couple of decent knocks; the one in Kandy to save the test was vintage Vaughan & there were the twin centuries @ Lords against The Windies, but since May 2003 he hasn't looked like the no 1 batter in the world or, indeed, anything like.

Is it the captaincy? Batting @ 4? Or is he just outta nick & should I stop worrying?

 

[Galactic_Soap]

Is it the captaincy? Batting @ 4? Or is he just outta nick & should I stop worrying?

Start worrying, the South African bowling lineup is one thing, but if hes going to walk into the next Ashes series carrying that form I'm sure they'd be a few Aussies more than happy to exploit his flaws.

South Africa needs to press home the advantage now and start quickly tomorrow. Let Jacques get his second ton !!! And have a good two days to bowl at them. Heres Vaughn chance to do an Atherton !!!

Cheers
Soapy

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Err line & length bowling is thoughtful?

Bowling the steady in-between length at a batsman who struggles against the steady in-between length is. He didn't try anything out of the ordinary, just kept plugging away at that plan and got rewards. Yes, that's thoughtful bowling.

I expect you to say that he should be bowling that length all the time anyway, but it's a fact that it won't work to get just any batsman out on this surface. If that were the case, Hoggard and co. wouldn't have had to keep mixing in offbreaks and short balls to the South African's today. Vaughan has a weakness there and it was exploited. That's good bowling.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Some would say it's negative on my part, but I can't help but make the observation that England still looks a far way off from truly stressing Australia in the Ashes. The biggest thing in my mind is Harmison. Yes, he's a much-improved bowler, but he still doesn't quite seem as good as he will have to be against Australia to lead this England attack.

England needs Harmison to lead the attack. I can see Hoggard causing the likes of Hayden trouble early in the innings, but he's not the type of bowler to lead an attack.

The batting looks fairly solid, providing Vaughan continues his career form against Australia, but they must all show application closer to the second innings of the last Test than to the first innings of the last two Tests. Those sort of batting performances will be punished severely by a team of the quality of Australia. There's a line between confidence and overconfidence.

Now I'm sure it seems to some that I'm preaching to England supporters and whatnot, but I myself will be backing England in the Ashes series this year. In fact, I hope to attend a match somehow. As David Lloyd (I think) was saying earlier on today, the moves of England over the past year or so have been with Ashes series in mind. I believe that all that has been accomplished and will be accomplished leading into the series is but a warmup for the real test.

As things look now, England still has a lot of work to do.

 

[Galactic_Soap]

Vaughan has a weakness there and it was exploited. That's good bowling.

^^ Exactly

 

[Mister Wright]

Boy does kallis ever get out for less than 100 these days? Seems like every innings hes getting 100s. Nobody can get him out.

It seems like Kallis is never out of form. He either is in good form or great form. The only blot on his career so far is not having a double century, but I'm sure it is only a matter of time.

 

[PY]

As Liam has said, I'm not too worried about any of this crapness that England have produced this Test to be honest except for one man and that is Harmison. I'm more than a little worried about him now. He's not only taking wickets but he's also returned to spraying it down legside and bowling very short outside off. Throw in that hilarious off the pitch ball that almost chinned Flintoff and me smells a problem, I'm willing to wait due to the previous year but for the Ashes, that's a different proposition.

I think Athers (what I wouldn't give for him to still be around to do a Wanderers '95 again ) got it spot on. Harmison came in undercooked to this series and because of that he had no rhythm, due to this lack of rhythm he didn't take wickets and got tonked. Because of this, he lost his confidence and as I (and a few others) have been saying Harmison is a confidence bowler more than anyone in the England side.

Troy Cooley is flying out pf South Africa tomorrow as well so I'm not sure what they are going to do about it. In my opinion, get a collection going to send Sir Bobby Robson out to SA for a holiday and have a chat to Harmo.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

It seems like Kallis is never out of form. He either is in good form or great form. The only blot on his career so far is not having a double century, but I'm sure it is only a matter of time.

Tendulkar took longer, but he got his. That said, a double century is not the mark of a good player. Not if that player averages 55 and has 25-30 hundreds when all is said and done.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I'm more than a little worried about him now. He's not only taking wickets but he's also returned to spraying it down legside and bowling very short outside off. Throw in that hilarious off the pitch ball that almost chinned Flintoff and me smells a problem, I'm willing to wait due to the previous year but for the Ashes, that's a different proposition.

It may really be that he just needs time bowling. Sure, getting hammered won't help him at this stage, but bowling will. I echo the commentator's sentiments when they stated that what South Africa did in the final session is ideal for Harmison right now. They didn't get after him. They let him bowl to them and that's a step toward him finding some semblance of rhythm.

 

[PY]

29 years of age with what is likely to be 20 Test centuries after this game, the sky is his limit to be honest.

Well, at least 10,000 Test runs.

PS Why are people bitching about him not scoring quick enough in the Press? It's ridiculous, how can someone be faulted for scoring 9 (plus 1) centuries in his last 13 Tests?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Kallis has shown so many times before that he is more than capable of scoring at a brisk rate. Indeed, he did so today. The fact is that it's Test cricket and Kallis is the best batsman in the lineup. He can't always go out there and breeze through an innings. More often than not a more concerted effort is required.

 

[Mister Wright]

Tendulkar took longer, but he got his. That said, a double century is not the mark of a good player. Not if that player averages 55 and has 25-30 hundreds when all is said and done.

I know it won't stop him from being considered a great, but I'm sure it is something that he wants to do.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I do wonder why Kallis isn't the biggest star in cricket sometimes. I mean, aside from being one of the best (let's be conservative) half-dozen batsmen in the world, he was (until he knackered his side) a more than useful bowler.

I know there are "lies, damned lies & statistics", but if you compare his career figures to Sir Garfield's (unquestionably the best "batting" all-rounder thus far) they stack up pretty well:

JK: 6650 runs @ 55.88, 167 wickets @ 30.94
Sir GS: 8032 runs @ 57.78, 235 wickets @ 34.04

 

[marc71178]

3 by my count. The Amla one was horrible and the one against Dippenaar today was about the same. Add that to the not out against Smith in first innings and you've got a hat-trick.

Although amusingly the Smith one was actually initially called a superb decision y Talksport's commentators.

 

[marc71178]

The only blot on his career so far is not having a double century, but I'm sure it is only a matter of time.

Although the Mork-esque rate at which he seems to bat means it will be a long time!

 

[Pratters]

Nay. It's FAR too early to say. South Africa has fallen so far from the quality of team of a few years aback. It's not as though success has been so long ago. You speak like it's been a long toil and South Africa are finally showing signs of recovery.

South Africa has two truly world-class players in Shaun Pollock and Jacques Kallis. The likes of Graeme Smith, Jacques Rudolph and Makhaya Ntini are very good too though, but still aren't at the level of the above two mentioned.

South Africa has never had the so called World class players. Even when they were quite clearly one of the best, the only 'stars' they had were Cullinan, Donald, Pollock,Kallish

Pollock is far from his best right now but still very effective.

Smith, Gibbs are qality players. No denying that. Its more about how well the team plays collectively than how many stars it has. New Zealand doesnt have that many star players but always compete.

Its more about gelling together as a team and it can always happen faster than people can anticipate. No one thought England would improve so drastically in a year. Hussain had his role to play earlier but still the transformation under Vaughan has been pretty extraordinary. The permanency of it all though still remains to be seen.